Bangalore District Court
P1 S.Lakshmi vs Manjunath on 12 June, 2024
1
C.Misc.120/2017
KABC050045612017
Presented on : 20-07-2017
Registered on : 20-07-2017
Decided on : 12-06-2024
Duration : 6 years, 10 months, 23 days
IN THE COURT OF THE METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE
TRAFFIC COURT- III, BENGALURU.
DATED THIS THE 12th DAY OF JUNE 2024
Present: Smt. Kusuma. V.
Metropolitan Magistrate,
Traffic Court-III, Bengaluru.
Crl. Mis. No.120/2017
Petitioners : 1. Smt. S. Lakshmi,
W/o K.S.Manjunath,
D/o Shivaprakash,
Aged about 37 Yrs.
2. Master. K.M. Sukheth
S/o K.S. Manjunath,
Aged about 15 Yrs.
3. Master. K.M. Samvedh
S/o K.S. Manjunath,
Aged about 10 Yrs,
Petitioner nos.2 & 3 being minor
represented by the petitioner no.1.
All are R/at No.1,
2
C.Misc.120/2017
Mico Layout,
West of Chord Road,
Mahalakshmipuram,
Bengaluru-86.
(By Sri. R.V. Adv.)
V/s.
Respondent : Sri. K.S. Manjunath
S/o Late K.V. Sheshadri,
Aged about 47 Yrs,
R/at No. 323,
Lake View Residency Layout,
Venkatala,
Yelahanka,
Bengaluru-64. (Permanent Address)
Alternative Address:
R/at. No.2221, 5th Main,
RPC Layout, Hampinagar,
Vijayanagar,
Bengaluru-04.
(By Sri. N.D. Adv.)
ORDERS ON MAIN PETITION
1. This is petition filed by the petitioner under Sec. 12 of
Protection Of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
2. By filing this petition the petitioner has sought various
reliefs fallen U/sec. 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22 of DV Act.
3
C.Misc.120/2017
3. The format as required under the DV Act is duly filled up
and the same is presented by the petitioner along with the
affidavit. In the required format, the detail of the petitioners'
case cannot be made out, the same can be gone through in the
evidence let in by the petitioner. Hence, before considering the
reliefs sought for, it becomes just and necessary to look into the
case of the petitioner.
4. The petitioner no.1 submits that the petitioner no.1 and
the respondent are legally wedded wife and husband, their
marriage was solemnized on 23.07.2001 at Chamraja Kalyana
Mantapa, Jayanagar, Bengaluru. The entire marriage expenses
approximately Rs.2,00,000/- were borne by her parents alone.
Our marriage was consummated on the same day of marriage.
At the time of marriage her parents has given dowry of 700 grms
of gold, Rs.1,00,000/- cash, a gold chain, a gold bracelet, a wrist
watch, a gold ring, a suit and clothing etc., as demanded by the
respondent and his other family members. Her parents
celebrated the marriage by availing loans from relatives and
friends.
4
C.Misc.120/2017
5. Prior to the marriage, the respondent and his parents had
informed us that the respondent is a software engineer and he is
working at Kshema Technologies. But, after the marriage the
petitioner came to know that the respondent was jobless at the
time of marriage. After the marriage, when she went to the joint
family of respondent at Vijayanagar, Bengaluru for leading the
happy married life with the respondent, but respondent and his
other family members treated her as housemaid. The respondent
was not taking care of her and further not bothered to drop her
to the college and she was doing her internship in BAMS at the
time of marriage. When she requested the respondent to search
a job, he used to become arrogant and aggressive, further he
used to behave in an abnormal way, used to scold her in filthy
language. Later she came to know that the respondent is a
psychiatric patient.
6. Thereafter, the respondent secured a job in the month of
July 2002 at Birla Software in Noida, New Delhi. At that point of
time, she was pregnant and as a duty bound wife, she followed
him to stay with him at Noida, Delhi. After staying with the
5
C.Misc.120/2017
respondent in Noida for about 4 months, she returned back to
Bengaluru for her delivery. Since, it was her first delivery, she
had to go to her parent's house as per tradition, but the
respondent insisted her to stay in his parent's house. Though it
was against to our tradition, she stayed with her in-law's house
for some days, during which she was once again tortured and
treated like a maid servant without taking her to hospital for her
regular check-ups and not even getting her the required
medicines. Consequently, she was unwell for quite some time,
inspite of it, she was asked to do all the household works. All the
medical expenses for her checkups and delivery were borne by
her parents and she was forced to stay at her parent's house for
more than ten months after delivery. After nine months of
delivery, the respondent and his parents insisted her parents to
celebrate the naming ceremony of the child in a grand manner
as per their demand and accordingly, it was done. After the
naming ceremony of her child, the respondent insisted her to
leave her small kid in her parents' house and further insisted
her to stay with him at Delhi. Accordingly, she went to Delhi and
6
C.Misc.120/2017
stayed with him. During her stay in Delhi also there was no
proper facility provided with regard to her day-to-day needs.
After securing the job at Bengaluru in 2004 he shifted to
Bengaluru from Delhi. On the advice and interference by the
well wishers, respondent and herself along with their child
moved to the first floor to live along with his brother's family.
Being not happy with this move, his sister-in-law and brother
K.S. Bhaskar used to abuse her in unparliamentary words, they
used to beat the child without any reasonable cause for each
and everything. Further, the respondent and his family members
used to pick up quarrels for petty reason with her.
7. The petitioner no.1 further submits that in the month of
December 2005, he told her that he got the job in different
company at Navi Mumbai and he will be going to UK on an
assignment given by his company and shown a colourful picture
to give best education and bright future to his child. He even
requested her to stay with his parents along with the child only
for few days and promised to take her to UK. On believing his
colorful words, she moved to her in-laws house along with the
7
C.Misc.120/2017
child. But they once again started to give tortures to her and the
child. In order to over come and avoid her mental agony by her
parent-in-law, she joined a yoga course at SVYASA at Jigani. As
usual, she used to starve without food and has slept many days
by drinking water. Later she came to know that the respondent
needed a maid servant to look after his parents and nothing
more. With several request and force, the respondent took her to
UK only for few months, because even in UK the respondent
used to torture her both physically and mentally. On 29.06.2006
she gave birth to the second child by name K.M. Samvedh. The
petitioner no.1 specifically state that the respondent is of
suspicious character and he suspects her each and every
movement. Apart from this, he behave in an abnormal way,
scolds and beats her very violently and arrogantly. Apart from
this he follows her daily from her house to her part time at
Kottaikal Arya Vaidya Sala at Yelahanka New town. The
petitioner no.1 is an Ayurvedic Doctor by profession and
presently she is working as a part time doctor at Kottaikal Arya
Vaidya Sala situated at Yelahanka New Town and getting a
8
C.Misc.120/2017
salary of Rs.5,000/- per month. Every now and then he calls her
friends and relatives over phone and spreading badly about her
character by saying that she is having illegal affair with the said
Sri.Shashikanth. The respondent had one TUDA site at Tumkur
and has sold it for Rs.37,00,000/- and has invested the said
amount in finance and getting monthly interest of more than
Rs.60,000/- as such he is presently doing the finance business.
Apart from this, he is also having rental income of Rs.40,000/-
as is share from his parents' house property situated at
Vijayanagar. Hence this petition.
8. On service of notice, the respondent has appeared before
court and filed vakalath through his counsel and filed objections
to the main petition. In the objections, the respondent stated
that the parents of respondent never demanded the dowry before
nor after the marriage, further the respondent never received the
gold of 700 grms, Rs.1,00,000/- cash, gold chain, a gold
bracelet, wrist watch, gold ring, suit and clothing. The petitioner
is well qualified and completed her degree in medicine and had
good language and after going through the status of respondent
9
C.Misc.120/2017
and his family agreed for marriage and even there was separate
one to one interaction with petitioner before the marriage was
fixed, nothing was suppressed regarding family background and
respondent position, unfortunately after engagement due to
recession in market lost the job. Even the petitioner allegation
are vague, it does not disclose date and circumstance under
which she was ill-treated, only to degrade the respondent family,
the false allegations are made. Even immediately after the few
months of marriage the petitioner was pregnant and as per
request, she went to parents house. The petitioner had very
close family friend by name Shashikanth, this was not known to
the respondent till 2017 April, but the petitioner often use to go
back to parents house without any reasons and she given all
type of freedom to improve her behaviour, but use sit gloomily in
house, was sent to practice yoga and was asked to practice her
professional, but in spite of providing all type of freedom and
knowledge the petitioner use to prefer to go back to parents
house even leaving behind the children's, the respondent due to
his nature of work often visited outstation place, the petitioner
10
C.Misc.120/2017
took this to her advantage and slowly developed the relationship
with the Shashikanth, due to her haughty nature and having
illicit relation, the petitioner all ways tried to put up house near
by parents house where Shashikanth was living. The petitioner
arrived to the Bengaluru with plan and at instant of
Shashikanth, the petitioner started behave indifferently to shows
before her parents that all is not well and what is happening is
due to the respondent act, but she had other idea to file divorce
petition and get married with Shashikanth, at his instruction
and made their father to believe and filed false MC before family
court same number as 4532/2013, even before 2013, the
petitioner was mentally separated and finally petitioner and
Shashikanth decided to break the marriage, but Shashikanth
wife did not agreed for the same, then the petitioner revert back
to old style and asked elders to compromise the matter, the
respondent was not aware of these facts agreed for compromise
and allow the petitioner and children's stay along with him, but
the petitioner with criminal intent acted and made to believe the
parents and society and friends, the said matter was dismissed
11
C.Misc.120/2017
for non-prosecution.
9. The respondent further submits that after collecting entire
call records and text details and conversation held between the
petitioner and Shashikanth, totally about 20 days activity, the
entire details are recorded in respondent laptop HP Pavilion,
entertainment, the entire moments are noted and finally the
respondent came to know that the petitioner and Shashikanth
have secretly married and planning to eliminate the respondent,
the respondent was very much aware of that his life is under
danger and patiently waited, but finally the both of them made
separate house to meet regularly during day hours, the
respondent knowing these followed them and called the police,
the local Yelahanka new town police arrived to the spot and
verified the both of them, the petitioner and Shashikanth
accepted their relationship and they are secretly married each
other and said fact is not known to the house owner pleaded the
police and respondent to give up his name, since both of them
planned to kill or eliminate the respondent and cheated the
respondent all these years and given all type of harassment and
12
C.Misc.120/2017
torture, the respondent insisted the police to registered the case
and know the real truth.
10. The petitioner is well educated and earning money on her
own and having sufficient means to lead the life, the parents of
the petitioner are very well off, rent of Rs.75,000/- to
Rs.1,00,000/- in the rental income alone, in fact the
Shashikanth who is having relationship with petitioner should
be made a party to proceeding to effectively determine the real
fact and answer the issue regarding domestic violence in the
present circumstances of the case.
11. The respondent is also prefer to file custody of the
children's and keeping in interest of the children's welfare the
respondent is till now taking care and paying school expenses,
the petitioner showing custody of children's illegally claiming
maintenance is not sustainable in eye of law, hence application
u/sec. 12, 18, 22 are liable to be dismissed. Hence, prays to
dismiss the petition.
12. Keeping in mind the evidence given by the petitioner it
13
C.Misc.120/2017
becomes just and necessary to look into whether the orders
required by the petitioner various reliefs which are fallen under
Sec. 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22 of DV Act can be granted.
13. The petitioner in support of her case has got examined
herself as PW.1 and got exhibited documents as Exs.P.1 to 17.
Ex.P.1 is certified copy of order sheet in CR no.107/2017, Ex.P.2
is certified copy of FIR in Cr.no.107/2017, Ex.P.3 is certified
copy of requisition, Ex.P.4 is mutation extract, Ex.P.5 is school
receipts, Ex.P.6 is rent agreement dtd: 25.08.2017, Ex.P.7 is
certified copy of order sheet in MC no.2777/2017, Ex.P.8 is
certified copy of petition in MC no.2777/2017, Exs.P.9 & 10 are
complaints, Ex.P.11 is marriage invitation, Ex.P.12 is school
receipt, Exs.P.13 & 14 are birth certificates and Exs.P.15 to 17
are adhar cards. The respondent examined as RW.1 and got
exhibited documents as Exs.R.1 to 21. Exs.R.1 & 2 are bank
accounts, Exs.R.3 & 4 are sale deeds, Ex.R.5 is 'B' register
extract, Ex.R.6 is tax invoice, Ex.R.7 is sale deed, Ex.P.8 is
photo, Exs.R.9 & 10 are call record lists, Exs.R.11 & 12 are fee
receipts, Ex.P.13 is bank account, Ex.R.14 is gift deed, Ex.R.15
14
C.Misc.120/2017
is disability certificate, Ex.R.16 is ID card, Ex.R.17 is insurance
card, Ex.R.18 is RC, Ex.R.19 is LIC bond, Ex.R.20 is bank
account and Ex.R.21 is school receipt. One Sathish is examined
as court witness and got exhibited Exs.C.1 & 2. Exs.C.1 & 2 are
bank account.
14. Heard by both sides. Perused the materials placed on
record.
15. The points that arise for consideration are:-
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled for the
Protection Orders as contemplated U/Sec.18 of
DV Act?
2. Whether the petitioner is entitled for residential
order relief as contemplated U/sec.19 of DV
Act?
3. Whether the petitioner is entitled for monetary
relief as contemplated U/sec.20 of DV Act?
4.Whether the petitioner is entitled for relief as
contemplated U/sec.21 of DV Act?
5. Whether the petitioner is entitled for compensation
as contemplated U/sec.22 of DV Act?
6. What Order?
The findings to the above points are as follows:-
15
C.Misc.120/2017
Point Nos.1 to 5 - In the Negative
Point No.6 - As per Final Order, for the
following:-
REASONS
16. Reasoning on Point No.1 to 5: Since these points are
interconnected with each other and requires common
appreciation of evidence, hence to avoid repetition of facts all
the points are taken together for common consideration.
17. The case of the petitioner is that the respondent has
given mental and physical harassment by demanding additional
dowry and for grant of permanent accommodation. The
petitioner has sought for various reliefs which are fallen U/sec.
18, 19, 20, 21 and 22 of DV Act.
18. The respondent no.1 in his objections, he admitted
relationship with petitioner. Further, he taken the contention
that without valid reason with an intention to drag the
respondent to the court, the petitioner has filed this petition.
The respondent has not taken care of her and her children.
Further, the respondent is became arrogant and aggressive and
16
C.Misc.120/2017
he behave in an abnormal way, used to scold the petitioner no.1
in filthy language. Except this allegations, the petitioner no.1
has not made out any specific allegations against the
respondent.
19. As per the provisions of Sec.18 of DV Act. As per this
section, the Magistrate may, after giving the petitioner and the
respondent an opportunity of being heard and on being prima-
facie satisfied that domestic violence has taken place or is likely
to take place, pass a protection order in favour of the petitioners
and prohibit the respondent from committing such domestic
violence.
20. In the affidavit filed by the petitioner no.1 along with
petition she has stated that the averments made in the petition
are all true and correct. The petitioner no.1 has stated that she
was subjected to verbal and emotional abuse and she was also
subjected to emotional violence by not taking care of the
petitioners. Now the petitioners are living separately apart from
the respondent.
17
C.Misc.120/2017
21. Further on perusal of the petition, it can be seen that
the petitioner no.1 and respondent were living in shared
household, at that time respondent has harassed the petitioner
mentally by not taking care of her. On the other hand, the
respondent has also filed objections by denying the allegations of
the petition leveled against him. On perusal of the pleadings of
both sides, it appears that there is no marital dispute between
the petitioner no.1 and the respondent, but the petitioner no.1
except mentioning allegations against the respondent, she has
not furnished any single document to show that the respondent
has caused domestic violence against the petitioners. Further,
she has not furnished any documents to show that the
respondent has caused harassment to the petitioner no.1. It
seems that the respondent has not caused any domestic
violence against the petitioners.
22. No doubt, as per Sec.3 of DV Act if at all the respondent
commits any domestic violence as above pleaded is fully
established by the petitioner then definitely the petitioner will be
entitled for an order of protection under Sec.18 and for
18
C.Misc.120/2017
residential orders as per Sec.18 of DV Act and mandatory reliefs
as contemplated under Sec.20 of the Act.
23. As per Sec.19 of DV Act while disposing an application
U/sec.12(1) PWDV Act, a Magistrate, may on being satisfied that
the domestic violence has taken place can pass residence order
restraining the respondent from dispossessing or in any other
manner disturbing the possession of the petitioner from the
shared household.
24. In the case on hand, it is the case of the petitioner no.1
that she is residing along with the respondent after the
marriage in the shared house, wherein the respondent has
caused emotional and mental harassment to the petitioner no.1.
In this case, on perusal of the pleadings as well documents it
clearly appears that the respondent has not caused any
domestic violence against the petitioners. Therefore, the question
of granting residential orders as per Sec.19 of DV Act cannot be
considered in favour of the petitioners.
25. With regard to the reliefs as contemplated under Sec.18
19
C.Misc.120/2017
i.e, the protection orders as well as regarding the possession of
mandatory reliefs as contemplated under Sec.20, it becomes just
and necessary for the petitioners to establish the same.
26. On the basis of material document as well as
document, it is clear that both petitioner no.1 and the
respondent are wife and husband. When the petitioner no.1 has
let in evidence she has stated that subsequent to marriage, she
was residing with the respondent in the shared household.
There, the respondent has harassed the petitioner no.1 mentally
and emotionally, then the respondent has forced the petitioners
to leave the matrimonial house and now she is residing
separately apart from the respondent.
27. While deposing before the court the petitioner no.1 has
stated that she has also contended that the respondent has
used to harass her not providing basic necessities to lead her
and her children. But, on perusal of the pleadings as well as
chief affidavit of PW.1, it is clear that the respondent has not
caused domestic violence against the petitioners. On perusal of
the same, it is clear that there was no domestic violence against
20
C.Misc.120/2017
the petitioners caused by the respondent.
28. On the other hand, after service of notice, the
respondent has appeared before the court by filing vakalath from
his counsel and filed objections to the main petition by denying
the allegations leveled against the respondent by the petitioners.
Further they denied all avernments of the petition.
29. The petitioner examined herself as PW-1 by filing
affidavit of examination-in-chief. In the said examination-in-
chief, she reiterated the avernments of the petition. The learned
counsel for the respondent has cross examined PW.1, but in the
cross examination also she denied the suggestions of the
counsel of the respondent. Further, the respondent himself
examined as RW.1 by filing affidavit in lieu of examination-in-
chief and also he furnished several documents on his behalf.
The main contention of the respondent is that the petitioner
no.1 is having illicit relationship with one Shashikanth. In the
cross examination, she admitted that she is always making call
to the said Shashikanth. Further contention of the respondent is
that already the petitioner no.1 and respondent have obtained
21
C.Misc.120/2017
divorce competent court. On going through the oral and
documentary evidence of petitioner no.1 and respondent, it is
clear that due to the dispute in marital relation between them,
the petitioners are now residing separately apart from
respondent. But on perusal of the oral submissions made by the
petitioner, it is clear that the petitioner has not made out any
specific allegations against the respondent. Therefore, the
respondent has not caused any domestic violence against the
petitioner no.1.
30. On perusal of the entire pleadings and documents and
oral testimony of the petitioner no.1, it is crystal clear that the
petitioner no.1 is wife of respondent, but she has not proved her
oral allegations against the respondent by adducing oral and
documentary evidence.
31. It is undisputed that on the date of filing the petitioner
no.1 was wife of respondent. Further, the respondent in his
objections stated that with an intention to harass the
respondent, she has come up with this petition.
22
C.Misc.120/2017
32. By oral and documentary evidence the petitioner no.1
has not made out her case regarding any type of domestic
violence caused by the respondent towards the petitioner no.1.
Further, on perusal of the documents furnished by the
respondent, it appears that the respondent had spent amount
for educational expenses of children and also he made LIC bond
in favour of petitioner no.2. Therefore there is no need to discuss
regarding income of the respondent to award maintenance to the
petitioners.
33. On going through entire materials on record, the
petitioner no.1 has not established her case i.e., the respondent
has willfully neglected the petitioners to maintain them and also
caused Domestic Violence against the petitioners.
34. The petitioner no.1 in her petition claimed several
reliefs. On perusal of the materials produced on record, the both
parties have obtained divorce from competent court of law.
Further, the petitioner no.1 has not proved her case. Therefore,
the reliefs sought by the petitioners in her petition are cannot be
considered.
23
C.Misc.120/2017
35. Further, the petitioner no.1 is failed to prove the
allegations which are made by her in the petition as well as in
examination in chief in respect of domestic violence caused by
the respondent as per Sec. 3 of PWDV Act.
36. The Section 3 in The Protection of Women from
Domestic Violence Act, 2005 reads as under;
Sec. 3. Definition of domestic violence.--
For the purposes of this Act, any act, omission or
commission or conduct of the respondent shall constitute
domestic violence in case it.
(a) harms or injures or endangers the health,
safety, life, limb or well-being, whether mental or
physical, of the aggrieved person or tends to do so and
includes causing physical abuse, sexual abuse, verbal
and emotional abuse and economic abuse; or
(b) harasses, harms, injures or endangers the
aggrieved person with a view to coerce her or any
other person related to her to meet any unlawful
24
C.Misc.120/2017
demand for any dowry or other property or valuable
security; or
(c) has the effect of threatening the aggrieved person
or any person related to her by any conduct
mentioned in clause (a) or clause (b); or
(d) otherwise injures or causes harm, whether
physical or mental, to the aggrieved person.
37. On careful perusal of the above section, it is clear that
in this case, the respondent has not committed any domestic
violence against the petitioners as explained above. On
discussing above, if the respondent has not committed any
domestic violence against the petitioners, as contemplated
u/sec. 3 of PWDV Act, the petitioners are not entitled for any
reliefs as prayed by them in their petition. Hence, this court
answer these point nos.1 to 5 in the the negative.
38. Point No.6: In view of the findings on the above point
nos.1 to 5 and the reasons stated therein, this court proceed to
pass the following: -
25
C.Misc.120/2017
ORDER
The petition filed by the petitioners U/sec. 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 is hereby dismissed.
(Dictated to the stenographer directly on computer, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 12th day of June 2024).
(Kusuma. V) MMTC-III, Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined for Petitioner:-
PW-1 S. Lakshmi List of documents marked for Petitioner:
Ex.P.1 Certified copy of order sheet in Cr.No.107/2017 Ex.P.2 Certified copy of FIR in Cr.No.107/2017 Ex.P.3 Certified copy of requisition Ex.P.4 Mutation extract Exs.P.5 & 12 School receipts Ex.P.6 Rent agreement dtd: 25.08.2017 Ex.P.7 Certified copy of order sheet in MC no.26
C.Misc.120/2017 2777/2017 Ex.P.8 Certified copy of petition in MC no.
2777/2017 Exs.P.9 & 10 Complaints Ex.P.11 Marriage invitation Exs.P.13 & 14 Birth certificates Exs.P.15 to 17 Adhar cards List of witnesses examined for Respondent:-
RW.1 Manjunath. K.S. List of documents marked for Respondent:
Ex.R.1 Bank account pass book Ex.R.2 Joint account pass book Exs.R.3 & 4 Sale deeds Ex.R.5 'B' register extract Ex.R.6 Tax invoice Ex.R.7 Sale deed Ex.R.8 Photo Ex.R.9 & 10 Call record lists Exs.R.11 & 12 Fee receipts Ex.R.13 Bank account book Ex.R.14 Gift deed Ex.R.15 Disability certificate Ex.R.16 ID card Ex.R.17 Insurance card Ex.R.18 RC Ex.R.19 LIC bond Ex.R.20 Bank account Ex.R.21 School receipt 27 C.Misc.120/2017 List of witnesses examined for Court:-
CW.1 Sathish List of documents marked for court:-
Ex.C.1 & 2 Account book M.M.T.C-III, Bengaluru.